Saturday, November 11, 2006

All five Shia Muslim pro-Syrian ministers in the Lebanese government have resigned, Hezbollah has said. They include two Hezbollah members and two from the Amal movement, its ally. In multi-party talks, Hezbollah had asked for cabinet seats that would give it and its allies power of veto but the majority group in parliament refused. Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora said he refused to accept the resignations but the five say they will stick by their decision.

The resignations came just two days before the government was due to discuss a draft UN document on a tribunal for those suspected of killing former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri last year.The tension in Lebanon has been building since this summer's war between Hezbollah and Israel and ahead of the formation of the tribunal.

As a result of the Hariri murder investigation and the recent indictment of former Iranian president Rafsanjani, things might soon be getting very interesting. It will be hard for the Lefties to argue that terror is "merely a law enforcement problem" - (one made worse by Bush) once these indictments and tribunals have been shown to be utterly USELESS - which is inevitable since neither Rafsanjani or Assad will ever agree to be tried in any court of law. So perhaps the Left will be smoked-out on this issue - and be forced to admit that the GWOT is a real global war - sooner than we think.

****11/12/06 UPDATE: We beat LGF by a full 12 hours on this story folks, proving once again you all should make TAB your first stop for news and analysis! AND TELL YOUR BUDDIES!

I've seen this story at a couple of sites the past few days. Al Qaeda appears to be retreating from Afghanistan. Everyone is counting this as a victory, and perhaps it is. At least one site was tying this story to the story of a few weeks back about Bin Laden being dead. I don't know, though. Read this story, and tell me if you think this sounds like good news:

Rohan Gunaratna, head of terrorism research at Singapore's Institute for Defense and Strategic Studies, and the author of "Inside Al Qaeda; Global Network of Terror," said "We have seen that several hundred, perhaps five to six hundred al Qaeda members who were located on the Afghan-Pakistan border, have now left."

Gunaratna adds that these al Qaeda members have returned "to their own home countries, particularly to Iraq, and also to other Middle Eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia and Yemen. We have seen a shift in Al Qaeda's thinking, in strategy."

Some of those who returned to their native countries in the Arab world and were caught have told investigators that the orders only specified al Qaeda's decision for the Arabs to depart Afghanistan. The choice of a route was left to al Qaeda's local commanders in Afghanistan, according to information given by arrested suspects to their interrogators.

"The standard answer was: We don't know why we were told to leave. The orders were very specific — leave Afghanistan now without wasting much time." The diplomat spoke on the condition that neither his identity nor that of his country would be revealed.

Leave, and leave fast? That's peculiar, especially when you consider they could simply melt away into the landscape. Methinks there's something more to this. There was also a call for Muslims to leave the United States recently. Some have speculated that that call was tied to a WMD attack. I don't know, though. If Al Qaeda had a nuke up their sleeve, it's a bit hard to believe they'd detonate it in Afghanistan, where there are very few actual Western assets.

So, what do I think is going on? Perhaps, it wasn't Afghanistan they were supposed to clear out of quickly, but the Afghanistan/Waziristan border region. Or, in other words, Waziristan. A while back, I ran a post here at Astute Bloggers conjecturing that the reason Pakistan ceded Waziristan was to make it an independent terrorist state, which would free the United States to attack it. When it was still part of Pakistan, we could not have reasonably attacked because (supposedly) Pakistan is our ally. If this is true, then it would make sense that Al Qaeda would want to clear out of there fast. In short, I believe they fear a massive aerial bombardment from the United States.

This interpretation of the 'retreat" from Afghanistan coincides nicely with the recent call for Muslims to leave the USA, and the fact that Osama got a fatwa to kill 10 million US citizens (according to Amanpour at CNN), the clearly apocalyptic talk from Ahmadinejad, and recent news reports of an impending attack in Europe.

I would guess that the jihadists are greatly ENCOURAGED by the recent Democrat victories: it places in power people likely to respond to the next "9/11" by appeasing them. On a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being absolute certainty), I consider the likelihood of a major jihadoterror attack within the next 2 years - here and/or the UK - to be 8. Unless we make GREATER and more successful efforts to destroy them, they will eventually hit us here again - with devastating results.

Ultimately, this means, in order to be safe and secure, we must neutralize Hizballah and Hamas and Syria and Iran. either we do this or we WILL be the victims of a mega-attack.

FURTHER SPECULATION: If Iran isn't neutered by the USA by September '08, I expect Israel to whack Iran. I feel that Iran knows this an therefore actually plans to whack Israel first - and dare the West to counter-attack. And while Iran waits for the West to retaliate, Israel's survivable second strike will vaporize Iran. Israel understands that Bush is lkess likely to act against Iran, now that he's lost the Congress, and Israel knows this means she must act to defend herself. She will - whether it is preemptively or after a mega-attack traceable to Iran.

Many downplay the significance of the US Congressional elections. It is the six-year slump, they say. But the truth is nonetheless glaring. By all accounts, Tuesday the George W. Bush era came to a close. The consequences of this turn of events on Israel will be dramatic. Unfortunately, it is doubtful that anyone has explained them to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert ahead of his scheduled visit to the White House next week.

Across the political spectrum in Washington today there is a sense that after years of wavering, in the wake of the Democratic victory in Tuesday's Congressional elections, President Bush transferred control over American foreign policy to his father's anti-war advisors.

The President's announcement of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's "resignation" Wednesday signaled the transfer of control over the war against radical Islam from Bush's team to Bush pere's team. Robert Gates, Bush's nominee to replace Rumsfeld, served as his father's deputy national security adviser and CIA director. Gates, who will arrive at the Pentagon from his present position as President of Texas A&M University where Bush I's presidential library is located, is closely associated with former national security advisor Brent Scowcroft and former secretary of state James Baker. He is a member in good standing of the Arabist wing of the Republican Party which dominated the President's father's administration.

Worth reading in full. The conservative movement would be advised to oppose Gates' nomination, since he could be damaging to the war on terror, and set back the battle by a number of years.

MK Effie Eitam is calling for a merger of sorts between the Likud and the National Union/National Religious Party, with the goal of toppling the Olmert government.

Speaking at a Likud gathering in a Tel Aviv hotel Thursday night, MK Eitam bemoaned the fact that "there is currently no opposition." He called upon the Likud members to agree to unite in one large opposition party - or at least to work together.

"Now that Avigdor Lieberman has left the right-wing camp and joined the government," Eitam told Arutz-7's Yedidya HaCohen, "we must unite all the forces to topple the Olmert government. Just today, Olmert said that Abu Mazen doesn't realize how far he [Olmert] is willing to go politically. Therefore, in light of the challenges that face us, and after the war in Lebanon, the most important thing to do now is to cooperate."

With this news, I certainly hope that Eitam is sorry for any damage he led to during the last elections. He was needlessly inciting against the Likud, and he owes them - and much of the public - a sincere apology. And for someone who argues that there's no opposition, well, it should be noted that even he's guilty in his own way of that, and now he'd be well advised to start proving that he can be a true opposition voice himself.

Friday, November 10, 2006

Arsonists set fire Thursday to a Jewish school north of Paris that had been badly damaged in another arson attack in 2003, police said. No one was injured. ... France has Europe's largest Jewish community — and, with an estimated 5 million Muslims, Europe's largest Muslim community, too. Anti-Semitic acts increased in France starting in 2000...

If it was a mosque, then Kofi and Chirac would protest and there'd be riots in every major capital in Arabia.This problem will be resolved when the police are empowered to smash the gangs of islamothugs, and when the courts deport them or throw them in jail for life. (And BTW: the candidate for the French presidency who promises to do just that wins in a landslide.)

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Friday called U.S. President George W. Bush's defeat in congressional elections a victory for Iran. ... "This issue (the elections) is not a purely domestic issue for America, but it is the defeat of Bush's hawkish policies in the world," Khamenei said in remarks reported by Iran's student news agency ISNA on Friday.

"Since Washington's hostile and hawkish policies have always been against the Iranian nation, this defeat is actually an obvious victory for the Iranian nation."

When the Democrats win, then the enemy wins. That's just a freakin' deakin' FACT.

The GOP is still the only party for hawks. The Dems are clearly the party of doves. It's the difference between "LET'S ROLL!" and "Let's talk!" If you think that our enemy - who are slaughtering innocent people by the thousands from Thailand and the Philippines to Sudan and Morocco, from Atocha to Beslan and Kandahar and Manhattan - will stand down if we retreat, or moderate their objectves or their means, then you are wrong about the enemy. DEAD WRONG.

Which is why I'm quite saddened by the results of the election: Now the Congress is controlled by people who are dead wrong about the enemy, and they will make every effort to pass legislation which will make us all less safe: from prematurely withdrawing from Iraq, to limiting the NSA; from getting tougher with Israel and easier on the so called Palestinians; from reducing NMD to curbing tools in the Patriot Act.

And every week we fail to diminish the enemy, is a week they get stronger. The enemy certainly seems to have a lot more resolve than the Dems. That's why I expect some mega attacks in Iraq and the UK and here in the coming months. IMHO: The enemy surmises that a few big attacks will put the already wobbly Dem doves completely into reverse, and transform the first battle cry of the GWOT - "LET'S ROLL!" - into "LET'S RETREAT!" (A recent report confirms my fears about an attack in Europe... and the UK, too... I think it's only a matter of a week or so before there's a warning about chatter about an impending attack here, too.. )

I pray I'm proved wrong. But the presence of Bush Sr. "realists" like Baker and Gates only makes me more sure I am right. These are the guys who bailed on Lebanon in 1983 and then on Tienammen. They showed me no courage or resolve then; I expect none now. Not from the Dem Congress, and not from the the so-called "realists."

I wish there were more men around like the one who said this:

If we wish to be free -- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending-- ... we must fight! ... The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. ... The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave.

... Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

The doves seem to have taken the other course, and seem to think that you can purchase peace with chains, appeasment, dhimmitude. They're wrong. And we shall pay the price. NO PASARAN agrees.

On January 8th of 2003, Congressman Charles Rangel [D-NY] began an extensive campaign to bring back the military draft. He repeatedly submitted legislative bills to begin a military draft and compel all American men and women up to the age of forty-two to serve two years of military service. Under the Republican-controlled Congress, such bills went down to defeat.

One of the few notable supporters of the draft was Congressman John Murtha [D-PA]. Congressman Murtha reportedly is preparing to campaign to take over the highly influential position of House Majority Leader. Congressman Rangel is set to take over the House Ways and Means Committee. Two proponents of a military draft will most likely take over two key leadership positions in the new Democrat-contolled House. Surely they were not lying to America when they proposed a draft? They would not make such a serious proposal for a mere political cheap shot, would they?

Likewise, much of the more reasonable criticism of Donald Rumsfeld was of the "we need more troops in Iraq" variety. Such criticism often came from traditional military men who disagree with Rumsfeld "leave a light footprint" strategy.

However, many dems, such as John Kerry and Hilary Clinton, to name just two, have clung on to that criticism over the past couple of years. If they weren't proposing a draft as a scummy political ploy, then we should now expect to see them propose and pass both a draft and more a bill to send more troops in Iraq. If they don't propose a draft now, then they are admitting they are scum who played politics with our troops during war-time in a bald-faced attempt to scare young voters into voting Democrat. Which would prove once again, that THEY HAVE NO SHAME.

"McGovern to meet with Congress on war": "George McGovern, the former senator and Democratic presidential candidate, said Thursday that he will meet with more than 60 members of Congress next week to recommend a strategy to remove U.S. troops from Iraq by June."

HERE'S THE TRUTH: When we abandoned Viet Nam in 1975 (two years after the last US tropps left), there was a massacre, as the freedom we had worked to bring to people collapsed out from underneath them, and the communists moved in and began killing. Tens of thousands of desperate Viet Namese people fled the massacre by jumping into boats and heading for the United States.

And, the Democrats seem to want to do all that again; this time to the Iraqis.

Have they no conscience?

Reliapundit adds:I think it would be a whole lot better if we set the way-back machine to 1981 and not 1971!

In court today the prosecution presented evidence from telephone taps and internet chat that the defendents in Sarajevo and those being held in Glostrup, Denmark, had regular and frequent contact, including travel planning etc. The prosecution will also present evidence that money transferred from Denmark was used to purchase explosives in Sarajevo.

Just my feeling. Gates will spearhead a shift to more clandestine warfare - which is more palatable (politically) and might be more effective, given the fact that asymmetrical warfare gives us little advantages.

Rummy has been ably running the clandestine efforts, but the Iraq War has overshadowed them. As we wind down the traditional efforts in Iraq, I think we will crank up the clandestine efforts there, and around the world.

Daniel Pipes finds startling news of a document written back in the early days of the US, that could give some clues about why the US has never engaged in a serious war with Islamofascism. This is important news, because in order to build the future, that's why we need to learn from the mistakes of the past:

Has the United States ever engaged in a crusade against Islam? No, never. And, what's more, one of the country's earliest diplomatic documents rejects this very idea.

The agreement's 11th article (out of twelve) reads: As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion, - as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen, - and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

In June 1797, the Senate unanimously ratified this treaty, which President John Adams immediately signed into law, making it an authoritative expression of American policy.

In 2006, as voices increasingly present the "war on terror" as tantamount to a war on Islam or Muslims, it bears notice that several of the Founding Fathers publicly declared they had no enmity "against the laws, religion or tranquility" of Muslims. This antique treaty implicitly supports my argument that the United States is not fighting Islam the religion but radical Islam, a totalitarian ideology that did not even exist in 1796.

Actually, the part about totalitarianism did exist, and is one of the themes of the Koran. That aside, look at this:

Beyond shaping relations with Muslims, the statement that "the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion" has for 210 years been used as a proof text by those who argue that, in the words of a 1995 article by Steven Morris, "The Founding Fathers Were Not Christians."

Could it be that this is one of the weapons used by moonbats who try to delegitimize the rights of Christians in America and elsewhere? Good question. Now, take a look at this startling discovery:

But a curious story lies behind the remarkable 11th article. The official text of the signed treaty was in Arabic, not English; the English wording quoted above was provided by the famed diplomat who negotiated it, Joel Barlow (1754-1812), then the American consul-general in Algiers. The U.S. government has always treated his translation as its official text, reprinting it countless times.

There are just two problems with it.

First, as noted by David Hunter Miller (1875-1961), an expert on American treaties, "the Barlow translation is at best a poor attempt at a paraphrase or summary of the sense of the Arabic." Second, the great Dutch orientalist Christiaan Snouck Hurgronje (1857-1936), reviewed the Arabic text in 1930, retranslated it, and found no 11th article. "The eleventh article of the Barlow translation has no equivalent whatever in the Arabic," he wrote. Rather, the Arabic text at this spot reprints a grandiloquent letter from the pasha of Algiers to the pasha of Tripoli.

Snouck Hurgronje dismisses this letter as "nonsensical." It "gives notice of the treaty of peace concluded with the Americans and recommends its observation. Three fourths of the letter consists of an introduction, drawn up by a stupid secretary who just knew a certain number of bombastic words and expressions occurring in solemn documents, but entirely failed to catch their real meaning."

What's amazing about this is that it's a form of early political corruption, and done at a time when democracy was far from being as fully thought out as it is today (for at least a century, women did not have the rights to vote in elections, and their rights to owning property like estates and businesses was very difficult or almost impossible). What the US government at the time did, you could say, was to perform something along the lines of taqqiya, the Islamic concept of deception, by writing up a document in English, scripted specially so that the American public would be tricked into accepting it, when in reality, it's something that they should've rejected.

These many years later, how such a major discrepancy came to be is cloaked in obscurity and it "seemingly must remain so," Hunter Miller wrote in 1931. "Nothing in the diplomatic correspondence of the time throws any light whatever on the point."

But the textual anomaly does have symbolic significance. For 210 long years, the American government has bound itself to a friendly attitude toward Islam, without Muslims having signed on to reciprocate, or without their even being aware of this promise. The seeming agreement by both parties not to let any "pretext arising from religious opinions" to interrupt harmonious relations, it turns out, is a purely unilateral American commitment.

And this one-sided legacy continues to the present. The Bush administration responded to acts of unprovoked Muslim aggression not with hostility toward Islam but with offers of financial aid and attempts to build democracy in the Muslim world.

And that's something that needs to change. And there are many changes that America's made for the better over the years. A change in how US policy should deal with Islam is one of the most important that's going to be needed right now. We cannot continue with policies of appeasement that cost many good Americans their hard-earned tax dollars, and just like Communist countries were isolated years before, so too will the Islamic world have to undergo isolation if that's what's needed for starters to tell them that we do not accept their hostility.

The gang at the Huffington Post is already preparing a push to restore the "Fairness Doctrine," the speech-squelching FCC regulation that was dumped by President Reagan in 1987. In an effort to destroy Rush Limbaugh and any conservative/libertarian viewpoint in the media, the Leftist have for years been pushing for a revival of this repugnant idea. Now, with a Democrat Congress, they're emboldened.

Thursday, November 09, 2006

it comes down to two things: balls and principles. you can't have one without the other. Liberals are congenitally devoid of both. But real conservatives have both in spades. One of my heroes, Winston Churchill, is a model for this: he had the balls to face Hitler and the Nazi threat head-on, and core principles he would not back down from. Reagan had the balls to look the Soviets in the eye and call them what they were: an evil empire. "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" God, what a moment to be an American! He stuck to his principles regardless of the flak, regardless of what the scumbags in the press said, regardless of how much he was demonized. Margaret Thatcher? Big balls and big principles. These are leaders, my friends, not compromisers.

My President, whom I have supported through thick and thin, has already caved to Speaker Pelosi and the new Congress. His desire to be buddies, his desire to restart that execrable "new tone" has overridden his need to be a leader. Instead of being pals, he should pull out his pen and say "This is my veto pen. I will use it." Reagan, God bless 'im, said that in a nationally televised speech. Balls. Principles.

... I've thrown away my Dubya mug, and I'll remove my Dubya bumper-sticker from my car tonight. Next week, for the second time in thirteen years, I will change the party affiliation on my voter's registration card from 'Republican' to 'Independent.' I'm done with them until we finally get real conservatives in the party leadership again.

...[T]he most likely outcome of these mid-term elections is another major terror attack on America. Whatever the smart analysis of the likely shape of domestic American politics over the next two years, America has now signalled a faltering of resolve; and that’s the cue for a redoubled Islamist attack....

Alarmist or realist?

Reliapundit adds: I think it is REALIST. When an action is rewarded it reinforces the action. Appeasement rewards terror and therefore encourages it. All human history proves this. Containment was also a failure: from 1950 to 1980 the USSR grew and grew and grew, gobbling up nations and enlarging its power, its tyrany. Only the confrontation started by Reagan ended the Cold War and the USSR, and in the process liberated half the world. Ever since LBJ threw in the towel, the Dems became out-and-out appeasers of the USSR, and they are appeasers of jihad now. I expect the attacks - already escalating worldwide - to get much worse.

“We face a hostile ideology -- global in scope…ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method… to meet it successfully we must carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle -- with liberty the stake.”

It was said by Ike 1961 - about the Cold War. It was true then - about Communism, and it is true today - about jihadism. We had the fortitude then. And largely bi-partisan support. This year's Dem victory makes me doubt we have it now. I pray I am wrong. It's just that since 1972 - when the dove Lefties took over the party - the Dems have been very anti-military and anti-American. The new crop of McGovern's are as bad as the old crop. In the cases of Kennedy and Kerry it's literally the same old peacenik crew. They're in leadership now. the ONLY good thing aboyut that is the fact that they can't run and they can't hide, and they can't pretend to be what they're not. NO MORE STEALTH LEFTISM. So maybe more people will see what they're really all about, and reject them in 2008. I HOPE SO.

As we look back on those critical years during the Cold War, so too our grandchildren will one day look back on this time as a defining moment in America’s history. History will judge whether we did all we could to defeat a vicious extremist enemy that threatened our security, our freedom, our very way of life. Or, if we left it to the next generations to try to fight an enemy strengthened by our weakness, and emboldened by our lack of resolve.

Over my lifetime, I have had the opportunity to live in times of great consequence, times of war and times of peace. I have met countless Americans from every corner of our magnificent country, and I have developed an abiding faith in the wisdom and good judgment of free people over time to come to the right decisions. I have seen us triumph over dictators and tyrannies of many forms, and I believe that if we persevere today -- and I am convinced we will -- if we make the right choices, and develop a clear understanding of the war we face today, we can overcome the increasingly lethal threats of this young century.

Despite all the enemy tries to do to make the world think otherwise, America is not what is wrong with the world. America is a force for good. We are on the right side of history. Let there be no doubt that the great sweep of human history is for freedom and we are freedom’s side.

In the most dramatic comments to date by a senior government member on the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear program, the former IDF brigadier-general described an untenable scenario of Israel "living under a dark cloud of fear from a leader committed to its destruction." ...

"I am not advocating an Israeli preemptive military action against Iran, and I am aware of all of its possible repercussions," Sneh stressed. "I consider it a last resort. But even the last resort is sometimes the only resort." ... Sneh said he still hoped the international community would institute effective sanctions against Iran, but that "the chances are not high... My working assumption is that they won't succeed."

Interviewed in his Knesset office, Sneh said his priority was to define Israel's national goals, including "preparing the IDF for victory in the next round with Iran and its proxies."

Sneh is an experienced old-hand - a former Dep. Mimister of Defense under Barak, and an MD. His words should make it clear to the Free World that the clock is ticking.

He's a minority president beset by a wave of disapproval, and he has few options outside of outright political warfare -- and in this case, the Democrats have all the big guns now.

BS. Clinton was neutered by Newt in 1994 and went on for six years and even survived impeachment. Some in the DNC think these Clinton years were A-OK. And reagan did pretty dang well with a Dem controlled Congress, too. As did Nixon. It might even turn out easier for Bush to take on the Lefties in the Democrat Party than the libs in the GOP. I think Bush will do just fine.

After all, Bush merely suffered an average 6th year drubbing. And he still has the veto and the bully pulpit. With these two cudgels he can put the Leftist Dems on the defensive and in a corner. He can force them to bottle up good judges, and force them to try to override his vetos.

And remember: the THUMPIN' the GOP got was not just due to WH errors, but also because of blunders by Hastert and Frist and the Gang of 14. With the filibuster and the veto the GOP can wage a powerful battle against the Leftists. I hope they do. After all, the people did not give the Dems a mandate for Leftism. Basically people were prematurely fed up with the war. And also, a few key Senate races were decided by 3rd Party candidates and/or clever liberal ballot initiatives. To be more successful the next election, the GOP must get back to its core principles of small government, low taxes, conservative judges and a strong national defense.

When I commented that the Democratic Party’s wins in our elections would prompt celebrations in the Middle East, several Nutroots bloggers immediately accused me of bigotry. And racism. And failing to wash behind my ears.

Racism is the standard Nutroots multi-purpose accusation, of course, as we saw in the elections when GOP candidate Bob Corker was ridiculously accused of using racist “jungle drums” in a campaign ad. (It was standard, stock dramatic music.)

And today we have a rash of reports from the Middle East showing that my “bigoted, racist” prediction was right on the money. The Arab Street is greatly pleased with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House, and so are their despotic rulers and jihad-enabling media.

Charles has beaucoup LINKS - proving TAB's prediction was right. (AND BTW: I can't find ANY OTHER BLOGGER - including Charles - who made this prediction the subject of a separate post in writing - before TAB. Whuich proves once again that TAB is usually RIGHT AND FIRST. Spread the word!) More proof that the enemy loves Democrats HERE.

UNHCR reports 220 killed in violence spilling over the border with Darfur. Who will stop this, and when?

Reliapundit adds: It would be nice if the non-Muslim peoples of Africa would wake up to the threat of jihad. Africa is an important front, and jihad - and spreading sharia - needs to be confronted there. If Africa fails to defeat jihad they will never modernize, and never be able to improve the basic standard of living for Africans. Africa needs more Westrnization and more industrialization and more free enterprsie and more transparency. The last thing it needs is to be under the thumb of an anti-modern and tyrannical 12th Century ideology.

This will not be the traditional Astute Bloggers post. I will make no assertions, nor will I reach any conclusions. I just want to pose a couple of questions. Check out this story from Associated Press:

The latest inquiry into Tillman's death by friendly fire should end next month; authorities have said they intend to release to the public only a synopsis of their report. But The Associated Press has combed through the results of 2 1/4 years of investigations — reviewed thousands of pages of internal Army documents, interviewed dozens of people familiar with the case — and uncovered some startling findings.

One of the four shooters, Staff Sgt. Trevor Alders, had recently had PRK laser eye surgery. He said although he could see two sets of hands "straight up," his vision was "hazy." In the absence of "friendly identifying signals," he assumed Tillman and an allied Afghan who also was killed were enemy.

Another, Spc. Steve Elliott, said he was "excited" by the sight of rifles, muzzle flashes and "shapes." A third, Spc. Stephen Ashpole, said he saw two figures, and just aimed where everyone else was shooting.

Squad leader Sgt. Greg Baker had 20-20 eyesight, but claimed he had "tunnel vision." Amid the chaos and pumping adrenaline, Baker said he hammered what he thought was the enemy but was actually the allied Afghan fighter next to Tillman who was trying to give the Americans cover: "I zoned in on him because I could see the AK-47. I focused only on him."

All four failed to identify their targets before firing, a direct violation of the fire discipline techniques drilled into every soldier.

There's more:

_Tillman's platoon had nearly run out of vital supplies, according to one of the shooters. They were down to the water in their CamelBak drinking pouches, and were forced to buy a goat from a local vendor. Delayed supply flights contributed to the hunger, fatigue and possibly misjudgments by platoon members.

_A key commander in the events that led to Tillman's death both was reprimanded for his role and meted out punishments to those who fired, raising questions of conflict of interest.

_A field hospital report says someone tried to jump-start Tillman's heart with CPR hours after his head had been partly blown off and his corpse wrapped in a poncho; key evidence including Tillman's body armor and uniform was burned.

_Investigators have been stymied because some of those involved now have lawyers and refused to cooperate, and other soldiers who were at the scene couldn't be located._Three of the four shooters are now out of the Army, and essentially beyond the reach of military justice.

Taken together, these findings raise more questions than they answer, in a case that already had veered from suggestions that it all was a result of the "fog of war" to insinuations that criminal acts were to blame.

Ok, here are my questions:

1) Does it help the armed forces and the soldiers therein to do such investigations into incidents of friendly fire?

2) Why is the Associated Press so interested in this story that they would "comb ... through 2 1/4 years of investigations."

Please tell me the answers, because I really don't understand. I will admit, I think I know the answer to question #2, but I haven't got a clue on #1

According to AFP, up to 20 airports have gone to the highest level of preparedness, after a letter, written in Tamil, threatening mulitlple carbomb attacks was found by personel cleaning the Chennai Airport. MORE HERE.

The trial of Said Mansour began yesterday in Denmark. He is accused of promoting terrorism by publishing and distributing enourmous amounts of material - cd's, dvd's, tapes, papers, etc... that support violent jihad against the West. Some of this material was found among the belongings of a man convicted and sentenced to 27 years in Spain for starting an al Qaeda cell; and in Italy among the belongings of an Iman convicted for planning an attack on the Milan metro; and in Germany, where they were found among the belongings of a member of the 9/11 Hamburg cell!

-

Mansour arrived in Court wearing an orange T- shirt with Guantanamo printed on it - and pleaded not guilty. (Instead of a trial why not send him there instead?)

-

The defense lawyer Peter Hjorne has made some fantastic statements: "In denmark you are permitted to have your own political viewpoints...this material may seem offensive but it is religious material...they are citations of the Koran". (Ironic how this defense is coherent with the broad criticism that Islam is not a religion of peace!) Hjorne also complained that the proscecution was planning to call a shia muslim to testify against Mansour, who is Sunni: Horne stated: "It's like calling a Nazi to testify against a jew during WWII".

-

Hjorne could have said 'its like having a jew testify against a Nazi during WWII' but that wouldn't have the same impact - would it? Or does he really believe shias are Nazi's?

Let us praise democracy and hope and that the latest election will lead to better things...the enemy in the GWOT is patient and our allies are few but victory will be ours as long as we never give up...meanwhile lets focus on some good news!

A few years ago Airbus and Boeing laid out 2 diverging strategies for the future of commercial aviation. I thought Boeing made the right choice - more efficient long range machines for point to point travel. Airbus chose to make a huge beast that would require expensive hub airport modifications and initially garnered a long list of orders which they cannot fulfill. The dice have been rolled and Airbus is well on its way to bankruptcy - except it will be bailed out by the governments and taxpayers that own it.

Paul Belien wrote this article in the Brussels Journal nearly a week before yesterday's elections. He argues that the Democratic takeover of the Congress could prove fatal for the very continent that celebrates the Democratic Party's victory: Europe.

If they lead to the American withdrawal from Iraq, Europe will face a widespread intifada. The withdrawal will be perceived as a defeat of the West and the Muslim “youths” in Europe’s cities will become even more arrogant. They utterly despise the Europeans, whom they perceive (not entirely without reason) to be men dressed up as ballerinas, and they hate America because it fights back. In a world ruled by men who only understand the language of power it is better to be hated than despised. If America withdraws the Islamist fanatics will despise America for it. They will take this as a sign that the West has been defeated and that the world is theirs.

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

The voting public is made up of many segments. Some are extreme - Left or Right. Some are Moderate "free-rangers" who pick'n choose from among many issues and both parties. Some only pay attention just before an election, and some - many if not most - don't care and don't vote.

The extremes and the free-rangers are nearly equally engaged and informed. Most by watching TV and reading their local newspapers and reading national magazines and also by reading news online and in the blogosphere. These are the activists and political junkies. Most of these voters have a dang good idea of who they'll vote for, and why. For or against. I think/guess they make up about 95% of those who vote. And these days, there are just about the same number of them in the GOP as in the Dems.

But the other 5% of the electorate is made up of people who have no party allegiance, and who aren't politically active all the time, and who only pay attention to the MSM. THESE ARE THE FICKLE 5%.

The lies and propaganda of the MSM GREATLY effects these voters. Polls show that these voters came to believe that our economy is not very good, and that we're losing in Iraq because that's the propaganda they got 24/7 from the MSM. The GOP machine and the POTUS and talk-radio and the blogosphere FAILED to connect with these voters; we failed to reach them and deprogram them. So they voted for the Dems. (When these voters are added to the Dems and when you subtract the disgruntled GOP'ers - who either stayed home or actually voted Dems - in protest, then you begin to see the crux of the problem.)

When we find a way to reach these voters, the Left-wing dominated MSM will have been made impotent. This is crucial because without the Left-wing MSM the Dems and the Left cannot win any elections anywhere. This is important because in order to defeat the jihadist enemy abroad, we must defeat the Leftists at home.

The Dem Leftists in Congress will now begin to attempt to dismantle our defenses, abandon our allies, appease our enemies, and raise our taxes and socialize industries, like healthcare. WHY AM I SO SURE!? They have always tried to do so in the past.

To win in '08, we must find ways to reach these less-engaged and undecided voters.

The following are statements made by Hamas leaders in the last two months:

Rejection of Israel and Its LegitimacyIn an interview, Palestinian Political Bureau head Khaled Mash'al told the daily Al-Hayat: "Why am I required to [recognize] the legitimacy of an occupying [entity] that is sitting on my land when there are millions of Palestinians who come from the land on which this entity is sitting? It is true that there is an entity called Israel, but I do not wish to recognize it." [1]

At an October 20, 2006 Hamas convention in Khan Yunis, Palestinian Foreign Minister Mahmoud Al-Zahar stated that "Israel is a vile entity that has been planted in our soil, and has no historical, religious or cultural legitimacy. We cannot normalize our relations with this entity. The history of this region has proven [time and again] that occupation is temporary. Thousands of years ago, the Romans occupied this land and [eventually] left. The Persians, Crusaders, and English [also] came and went. The Zionists have come, and they too will leave. [We say] no to recognizing Israel, regardless of the price we may have to pay [for our refusal]." [2]

Palestine From the River to the SeaOn the issue of a Palestinian state, Khaled Mash'al said: "The [Hamas] movement has agreed to [the establishment of a Palestinian] state within the 1967 borders and to a hudna… As a Palestinian, I am interested in a Palestinian state and I am not interested in the occupying state. Why do people require the Palestinians [to accept] the existence of two states as one of their principles and goals? The Zionist state exists. I [wish to] speak of my Palestinian state that does not exist. I am the one that has been denied [the right to] a state, to sovereignty, to independence, to liberty, and to self-determination. Therefore, my main [goal] is to focus on obtaining my rights. I wish to establish my state." [4]

Mahmoud Al-Zahar said: "We [aim to liberate] all our lands… If we have the option, we will establish a state on every inch of land within the 1967 [borders], but this does not by any means imply that we will relinquish our right to all the Palestinian lands. We want all of Palestine from [Ras] Naqura to Rafah, and from the [Mediterranean] sea to the [Jordan] river." [5]

Does that sound like a government which is willing to compromise for peace?

Like I always say, you just gotta love your enemies, when they tell the truth. Thanks Hamas.

The Dems don't have to make Pelosi the next Speaker. In fact, the text of the Constitution doesn't require the Speaker to even be a member of the House. So, I suggest to the Dems that they get creative and reach out and select a mega-star to become the next Speaker. Someone like... Bill Clinton, or Al Gore, or Al Sharpton, or Mark Warner, or Jimmy Carter. Heh. Actually, I am happy the new face of the Dems will be Nancy. She's the best thing to happen to the GOP since George McGovern.

Thailand just had a coup, in part so that they could APPEASE the jihadists in the south of Thailand - jihadists who have slaughtered 1700 non-Muslim Thai's since 2004.

India has done NOTHING - as in NADA, BUPKUS, ZILCH - since finding evidence of Paksitan's complicity on the recent terror attacks there.

NATO and the Afghan government have failed to eradicate the Taliban.

Pakistan has ceased attempting to gain government control of Waziristan.

North Korea has tested a nuke - and the West can't agree on any action.Iran is violating every rule of the IAEA as it steadily moves toward becoming a nuclear armed rogue nation, too - and the West cannot agree on any strategy.

Syria and Iran assassinate Hariri, and illegally arm Hizballah (in violation of UNSCR#1559) and try to overthrow the elected government of Lebanon - and the world does nothing - (except STOP Israel's attempt to neutralize their presence in Lebanon, thus SAVING Hizballah).

Israel allows elections in the so-called occupied territories, and allows a jihadterrorist group on the ballot, and withdraws from Gaza, and is then met with constant rocket attacks. When they retaliate for these rocket attacks - and the kidnapping of its citizens, the world stops them before they can deliver a coup de grace.

France suffers a permanent intifada and responds by promising more aid to the rioters and even erects a statue to 2 of them!

Spain elects a socialist after the Atocha bombings.

Blair is forced from leadership.

The GOP suffers the loss of Congress in the mid-term.

ALL OF THESE ACTIONS ARE - IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER - WITHDRAWALS, RETREATS AND APPEASEMENTS. It's as if we are in an age or retreat. The urge to retreat is pretty basic. Retreat doesn't have to be taught; IT'S A NATURAL IMPULSE. Standing and fighting is what has to be taught. And it helps, if you have something you feel is worth defending. Because today's Left is post modernist, they don't feel that the West has anything worth defending by going to war, and this is why we are in trouble. The Left says - in effect - the jihadists are not so bad, and the anti-jihad wingnuts are worse than you believe; therefore elect us and it'll all go away; the enemy won't bother us once the Bushies are gone.

And because many MANY people are tired of the GWOT - and take their liberty and lives for granted- and most love peace, theY wishfully trust the Left-wing appeasers. This is nothing new. Remember, Chamberlain was hailed as a hero and greeted by throngs of people when he returned from Munich with "PEACE IN OUR TIME!" He was greeted this way because people love peace. And they think it can be purchased cheaply. It cannot. Peace must be won - and defended. I hope that the USa and the UK and Israel and India and Thailand and the EU WAKE UP - and I pray that it doesn't take another horrific attack to wake them up.

From the November 8, 2006 Washington Post's front-page analysis of the November 7, 2006 election results:

...Democrats [will be challenged] to make the leap from angry opposition to partners in power. How far the balance shifts to the left remains to be seen. The passion of the antiwar movement helped propel party activists in this election year, and the House leadership under the likely new speaker, Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), hails from the party's liberal wing. But the Democrats' victory was built on the back of more centrist candidates seizing Republican-leaning districts, and Pelosi emphasized that she will try to lead without becoming the ideological mirror of Gingrich....

"It's not an affirmation of a Democratic agenda; I think that's clear, because they didn't offer one," said John Weaver, a strategist for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). "It's about how we as Republicans set aside our principles to try to stay in power. We decided to try to spend money like Democrats, we decided not to reform or tackle big issues. And at the end of the day, the American voters said, 'Enough is enough.' "

The complexion of the Democratic presence in Congress will change as well. Party politics will be shaped by the resurgence of "Blue Dog" Democrats, who come mainly from the South and from rural districts in the Midwest and often vote like Republicans. Top Democrats such as Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) see these middle-of-the-road lawmakers as the future of the party in a nation that leans slightly right of center....

No doubt about it, the Republican Party got spanked yesterday. But come the national elections of 2008, the Dems may themselves get spanked, so they had best not take yesterday's election results as a long-term mandate from the voters for the Democratic Party. Even the Washington Post is striking a note of caution.

Dammit! I had this idea last night, but I didn't post it fast enough. Chris Cillizza beat me to it. The only race that really broke my heart last night was the Maryland Senate race. Michael Steele was such a good candidate and ran such a good campaign, it's an absolute waste that he's not going to the Senate. And you know what, I don't give a damn that he's a black Republican. I like him because he's an intelligent, charismatic man that makes me go "Hell yeah!" everytime I hear him speak on the issues. He's the kind of new blood the Republican Party desperately needs, and now that he's not going to the Senate, he's an excellent choice for RNC Chairman. Yes, he can help with outreach to the black community, but more importantly, he can breath some life into the party as a whole and show future candidates how a campaign is supposed to be run.

He was the right candidate in the wrong year, but that shouldn't mean his contribution should go to waste.

Well, it was a rough night for us on the Right/Libertarian side of things, but there was some good news in my neck of the woods. The Republicans held onto the governorship in Nevada as well as two of the three Congressional seats that we've held for some time and John Ensign easily defeated Jimmy Carter's son to return to the Senate. Nevada seemed to go against the trend, but that's Nevada for you.

I think what has happened will be bad for the country, but the Republicans have no one to blame but themselves. And admittedly, I myself am to blame as well. Ronald Reagan came to Washington in 1981 saying government wasn't the solution to our problem, government is the problem. This was the guiding principle for Republicans for two decades, but somewhere along the way, it fell to the wayside. This happened for many reasons: the love of power and the desire to keep it, the unattainable quest to get the MSM to like us, and so on. I myself turned a blind-eye to the growth of government under Republican rule due to the war on terror. So sure I have been (and still am) that President Bush and the Republicans are the only ones that will fight our enemies and feel that our country is indeed worth fighting for that I've taken the position that you have to take the good with the bad. This may have been a mistake. We have to get back to demanding the party run on Reaganesque principles: reduced government; low taxes; low spending; strong defense. Many fatalists are saying the dream is dead and that it'll be generations before we can hope to turn the tide. Not so. Nothing is impossible if you can imagine it and if you're willing to work your butt off to achieve it.

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

Well folks, it looks like we might just have to fight the Pelosi and her Leftist stooges in Congress (and her comrades Chavez - and now Ortega!) as hard as we've been fighting the Jihadists and their UN/EU appeasers. So be it. As Churchill said:

... never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never-in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. ... These are not dark days; these are great days - the greatest days our country has ever lived; and we must all thank God that we have been allowed, each of us according to our stations, to play a part in making these days memorable in the history of our race.

The fight will get harder before it gets easier. But the ultimate victory - of individual liberty over Jihadism and Leftism - will be worth the fight.

9.20pm - Howard Dean on the war: "We have to get out of Iraq." That's what this election means to the rest of the world. As to how to get out, Howard says, "We just have to do it carefully and thoughtfully." Thanks for that. A "careful and thoughtful" defeat for America. Should do wonders for the state of the planet.

STEYN IS DEAD-ON: Terrorists in Thailand have recently forced a coup and continue their jihad... Hizballah rearms... And in Iraq - witll this calm things down by sending a message to the jihadist that we have the necessary resolve, or willit encourage themto really pur it on!? And what will Ahmadinejad say tomorrow?

IOW: If the Dems win, then - in effect (by saddling Bush with a Congress with a majority of appeasers and doves) - it's as if the USA has just tossed out Churchill and re-elected Chamberlain in the middle of WW2. Sheesh. It can only give succor to the jihadists.

All regions near to or below normal temperature (first time since February 2003 with no regions above average temperature).

Only 2 states above normal temperatures in October: New Hampshire and Texas.

Well... er um, I guess the USA ain't part of the globe or global warming is bunk. After all, so-called greenhouse gases haven't declined any, so - if they cause global warming, as some arue, the what accounts for the dip in temps? COULD IT BE NATURAL FOR AVERAGE TEMPS TO OSCILLATE? I think so.

WHY? Could it be because the other two candidates for the nomination - Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Laurent Fabius - are both Jewish? I think so. That and the fact thst she's very easy on the eyes. Seriously, Socialist PM Lionel Jospin lost his attempt to become President because of his momentary support for Israel and condemnation of Hizballah after a visit to Lebanon:

When French Prime Minister Lionel Jospin visited Israel in January 2000, he was attacked with stones by Palestinians because he dared to state the simple truth: "Hizballah is a terrorist organization." Instead of defending him, President Chirac preferred to condemn him and even said: "That is not the official position of France, Hizballah is a political movement."

Even though Jospin later recanted, the hard-Left never forgave him, ran against him and caused him to finish third and miss the run-off. MY POINT: it is wrong to underestimate the effects of pernicious anti-Semitism in France, or anywhere else. Segolene will win the nomination - and possibly defeat Sarkozy - who is part Jewish. This would be the end of France as we know her. C'est la vie.

I ask you to remember MURTHAGATE: in which 2 Leftist doves, (and PERHAPS soon-to-be Dem House leaders, Nancy Pelosi and Jack Murtha), help each other corruptly steer BIG CONTRACTS to their relatives and supporters. EXCERPT:

According to a June 13 article in The Los Angeles Times, the fiscal 2005 defense appropriations bill included more than $20 million in funding for at least 10 companies for whom KSA lobbied. Carmen Scialabba, a longtime Murtha aide, works at KSA as well. KSA directly lobbied Murtha's office on behalf of seven companies, and a Murtha aide told a defense contractor that it should retain KSA to represent it, according to the LA Times.

In early 2004, Murtha reportedly leaned on U.S. Navy officials to sign a contract to transfer the Hunters Point Shipyard to the city of San Francisco, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. A company called Lennar Inc. had right to the land, and Laurence Pelosi, nephew to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was an executive with the firm at that time.

Democrats have learned to avoid admitting to being liberals and this year are running a number of moderate candidates. If these new moderate candidates are elected and give the Democrats control of Congress, that control will be exercised by senior Democrats who will hold leadership positions — and all of them are liberal extremists, whether people like Nancy Pelosi in the House or Ted Kennedy and John Kerry in the Senate. Getting people to vote for moderates, in order to put extremists in power, may be the newest and biggest voter fraud.

One of the four Islamic leaders who fanned the flames of intolerance in the Muhammed Cartoon Crisis has emigrated from Denmark: Imam Sheik Raed Hlayhel is leaving because the courts in Denmark decided that the cartoons printed in Jyllands Posten were not in violation of the "racism paragraph" of the Danish constitution. His exit is welcomed by most Danes, and confirms the fact that Sharia Law and modern democracy are incompatible and that Islamic Fundamentalists have no interest in the freedoms we in the West enjoy.

The government in Denmark, and its faithful coalition partner - the rightwing anti-immigrant Danish Folkparty, are putting the final touches upon next years budget. It includes a significant reduction the tax on soda. You might ask "why is reducing the tax on soda so important to the Danish Folkparty?" Well you see, the Pakistani kiosk-mafia has been making tons of money smuggling soda into Denmark from Eastern Europe... and this is an effective way to take this source of illegal income away from these criminal gangs.

I'm sure area brand managers for Coca Cola and the likes will be glad they will no longer face so much competion from their own manufactiuring facilities in Poland...

A female suicide bomber blew herself up Monday afternoon near IDF soldiers operating in the northern Gaza town of Beit Hanoun. One soldier was lightly injured and no one except the bomber died. Marvat Masud, a resident of Jabaliya, was affiliated with the al-Quds Brigades, an offshoot of the Islamic Jihad terror organization. Masud was stopped by troops who became suspicious of her behavior as she approached wearing an explosive belt.

Masud detonated the bomb after coming as close as possible to the soliders at the checkpoint, but failed to achieve her goals. Only one soldier was wounded and no damage was reported.

Human Rights Watch cited practices such as rape victims being forced to marry assailants and light sentences for men who kill female relatives suspected of adultery. In a report released Tuesday, the rights group said families, tribal leaders and authorities, backed by tradition and discriminatory laws, often sacrifice victims' interests for "family honor." And the problem is getting worse with growing poverty and lawlessness in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the New York-based group said.

The report comes about a year after a Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics survey of more than 4,000 households found 23 percent of women said they experienced domestic violence, but only 1 percent had filed a complaint. Two-thirds said they were subjected to psychological abuse at home.

One-quarter are physically abused, and two-thirds are psychologiclly abused. According the Left-wing HRW. OH MY GOD! This is horrifying. If they were treated this way because they were gay or black, then perhaps more Lefties would be upset. Or maybe not; maybe the Left has become so so so SO post modern that they no longer believe that all women everywhere are entitled to their basic universal huiman rights; maybe the Left thinks women's rights are culturally defined, and should remain that way!?

I DON'T! I think that the international community should shun all nations which allow this sort of systematic/sytemic abuse: kick them out of the UN and ban them from all multilateral trade organizations and forbid them any international loans. For starters.

WHY IS THIS SO IMPORTANT? Because jihadoterrorists are NOT born in the womb; they are created in the family. And if the family is made up of men who beat their wives and daughters - and kill them to restore their honor, then we can never expect their male children to respect us infidels. REPEAT: If they'll murder the women in their own families to restore honor, then they will of course behead us infidels for... well, ANYTHING.

Monday, November 06, 2006

Three articles in the London TIMES Online published this week illustrate what is happening in Britain.Unmoored from their own ethical and religious tradition, Britons are propelling themselves down a slippery slope.

First, look at this article, which describes how physicians in the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists are seeking to have active euthanasia legalized. They want the right to kill babies they deem too defective to live, and state in a new classic of Orwellian Newspeak, that giving doctors the right to kill babies will be "ways of widening the management options available to the sickest of newborns." [Reliapundit adds: Your baby's death becomes merely a management option of the bureaucracy - at least in a state-financed/nationalized/socialist healthcare system. IOW: The doctors might very well deem your baby's death financially sound - and for the common good.]

The college’s submission was also welcomed by John Harris, a member of the government’s Human Genetics Commission and professor of bioethics at Manchester University. “We can terminate for serious foetal abnormality up to term but cannot kill a newborn. What do people think has happened in the passage down the birth canal to make it okay to kill the foetus at one end of the birth canal but not at the other?” he said.

It is significant that it is not the government which is forcing doctors to consider killing their patients, but doctors who are petitioning the government for the right to do so. That's the way it happened in Germany, too, where doctorsinfatuated with the ideals of the Eugenics movement persuaded the National-Socialist government to grant legal acceptance and tax-money support for a program that killed tens of thousands of German children. From the killing of Germans deemed too defective to live, it was but a short step to the killing of whole peoples who were judged too defective to live.

The second article describes another aspect of the German Eugenics program -- the Lebensborn Program, in which young women deemed sufficiently Aryan were pressured into bearing the illegitimate offspring of selected SS men.

Hitler believed the “Nordic race” was destined to rule the world. But many Lebensborn children ended up emotionally scarred underachievers, craving the warmth of family ties and alienated from their foster parents or mothers, who in many cases refused to speak about the programme, either out of shame or loyalty to the SS oath that they had sworn. The children’s suffering was worst in Norway, where many never recovered from the stigma of having a German father. Some were put in mental asylums.

“Say the words,” said the Ape-man, repeating, and the figures in the doorway echoed this, with a threat in the tone of their voices.

I realised that I had to repeat this idiotic formula; and then began the insanest ceremony. The voice in the dark began intoning a mad litany, line by line, and I and the rest to repeat it. As they did so, they swayed from side to side in the oddest way, and beat their hands upon their knees; and I followed their example. I could have imagined I was already dead and in another world. That dark hut, these grotesque dim figures, just flecked here and there by a glimmer of light, and all of them swaying in unison and chanting,

“Not to go on all-fours; that is the Law. Are we not Men?

“Not to suck up Drink; that is the Law. Are we not Men?

“Not to eat Fish or Flesh; that is the Law. Are we not Men?

“Not to claw the Bark of Trees; that is the Law. Are we not Men?

“Not to chase other Men; that is the Law. Are we not Men?”

And so from the prohibition of these acts of folly, on to the prohibition of what I thought then were the maddest, most impossible, and most indecent things one could well imagine. A kind of rhythmic fervour fell on all of us; we gabbled and swayed faster and faster, repeating this amazing Law. Superficially the contagion of these brutes was upon me, but deep down within me the laughter and disgust struggled together. We ran through a long list of prohibitions, and then the chant swung round to a new formula.

“His is the House of Pain.

“His is the Hand that makes.

“His is the Hand that wounds.

“His is the Hand that heals.”

And so on for another long series, mostly quite incomprehensible gibberish to me about Him, whoever he might be. I could have fancied it was a dream, but never before have I heard chanting in a dream.

“His is the lightning flash,” we sang. “His is the deep, salt sea.”

A horrible fancy came into my head that Moreau, after animalising these men, had infected their dwarfed brains with a kind of deification of himself. However, I was too keenly aware of white teeth and strong claws about me to stop my chanting on that account.

“His are the stars in the sky.”

At last that song ended. I saw the Ape-man's face shining with perspiration; and my eyes being now accustomed to the darkness, I saw more distinctly the figure in the corner from which the voice came. It was the size of a man, but it seemed covered with a dull grey hair almost like a Skye-terrier. What was it? What were they all?

Altogether a very disturbing picture of a deteriorating ethical climate in British medicine.